TYUMEN CORPORATION OF MONSTERS. How OSPI (Obligatory State Pension Insurance) officials, law enforcement officers, prosecutors and judges in a particular region caused us, the taxpayers, a damage of 51 million euros.

The entire Governor’s circle (numbering corresponds to the portraits left to right):

The Governor of the Tyumen region V. Yakushev;

The Prosecutor of the Tyumen region Vladimir Vladimirov;

Deputy Chairman of the Arbitration court of the Tyumen region V. Loskutov;

President of OJSC «Khanty-Mansi Bank», the poet Dmitry Mizgulin;

Chairman of the Tyumen regional court A. Sushinsky;

The chief of investigative management of UMVD of the Tyumen region the General Hawks;

General Manager of the Tyumen branch of OJSC «Promsvyazbank» (ex-Director of the Tyumen branch of OJSC «Khanty-Mansi Bank, accused of money laundering) V. Kvasov.

AUTHOR: Alexander Simakov, the «anti-corruption» monitoring group, explorer of the European Association of independent journalists (Luxembourg), member of the editorial Board of the international journal «OBJECTIVE» (Cyprus)

I specifically rendered words about damage to us, taxpayers, in the subtitle, not the state of Russia, since due to wrongful acts of state officials that caused economic and image damage to the state, they themselves are not affected by the consequences. These are the realities and the «peculiarities» of the Russian legislation and the entire legal system. Their «deeds» are committed with impunity, for which the Russian Federation then pays out of the budget, thus, that is out of our pockets as well.

The «anti-corruption» monitoring group EAIJ, has investigated the fraudulent activities of the OAO Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» management ( the President — Dmitry Mizgulin) for three years, in particular: money laundering, misappropriation of property obtained by crime. All these acts were somehow covered by the regional leaders-dealers, including the Governor Yakushev, his henchmen — the regional Prosecutor Vladimir Vladimirov and the Vice-Chairman of the Arbitration court, classmate V. Loskutova, as well as a large group of corrupt local bottling in state agencies, courts and law enforcement systems of the Tyumen region. Their furious and concerted actions led to the expulsion of a Tyumen businessman, Alexey Schmidt, out of Russia. He was deprived of all: honour, dignity, property, the right to life and freedom. Ten years of continuous persecution, 47 court hearings, a number of cases, the illegality of excitation of which the Prosecutor’s office (later) had to apologize in court on behalf of the Russian Federation. Together with the entrepreneur, who left his native country, and left his family (hopefully not forever). The family of Alexey Schmidt was forced to seek an asylum and protection from one of the European States.

Greetings from the civilized Europe

Having left to Europe, Alexey Schmidt continued to fight for the restoration of his rights and good name that he had as a businessman, thus he turned to the courts. In 2014, the International court issued a Decision on the establishment of facts having legal significance. These facts confirmed that Kvasov , being a swindler, falsified the evidence in a civil court of Tyumen together with judge Vladimir Agafonova, upon the presentation of receipts of an alleged debt that A. Schmidt owed. Agafonova concocted a Resolution of the Central district court of Tyumen, in the absence of the defendant, and ruled that the mythical debt is indeed owed. Alexey Schmidt, for long 10 years, tried to prove the falsification, applied to various law enforcement bodies, courts, but «the Corporation does not betray its people!». Subsequently, according to the statement of Kvasov against A. Schmidt, there was a criminal case initiated under article 177 of the criminal code – malicious evasion from payment of debt. This criminal case has become legendary in the Tyumen region, as it has illegally lasted for more than 10 years. This matter is still under consideration of a judge Shaderskina in the same Central district court of Tyumen. It became legendary due to the number of attracted partners wearing a military uniform and a long duration of the investigation: not only the regional Prosecutor Vladimirov was in charge. He personally oversaw the illegal actions of the «werewolves in epaulets» against A. Schmidt. Joined by the bailiff, that originally rigged the criminal case. Moreover, the Investigation Department of the MOI of Russia for Tyumen region, in the face of several investigators and their boss — General Yastrebov, as well as the Deputy Prosecutor of the Tyumen Faizullin, then — judge of the Central district court Agafonov, Panamareva, Sudarkina, led by their chief P. Ogoreltsev, as well as judges of the regional court, headed by chief of the «judicial Corporation» A. Sushinsky were all involved.

Hundreds of people, for 10 years, tried to convert A. Schmidt into a convicted criminal. Nevertheless, were unable to… you wonder what the law enforcement spends the money and effort on! However, during the regime changes, Alexey Schmidt was able to point this leash the place where they belong , which is prison. And now, they definitely miss and cry over Kvasov and Agafonova.

[toggles title=«The The history of the persecution of the entrepreneur A. Schmidt and wrongful acts of corruption can be traced in the publications in the magazine «OBJECTIVE» >> «]

…In addition, the court takes into account the fact that for more than ten years, Russia has not performed its duty, which violates article 2of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. A. I. Schmidt has not received the guaranteed legal protection provided in accordance with paragraph 1 and 2 of the article 17 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation in the various bodies of law enforcement and the judicial systems of the Russian Federation.

…Proceeding from the establishment of a legal fact about the relation occurring between Vladimir Kvasov and I. A. Schmidt, expressed in the provided by Vladimir Kvasov receipts, have value in determining the truth in the case considered and dealt with in the courts of the Russian Federation, the ICAC believes that in accordance with paragraph 7 of the Declaration of basic principles of justice for victims of crime and abuse of power (adopted by resolution 40/34 of the UN General Assembly on 29th November 1985) in this case, it is necessary to use an alternative and independent from the Russian Federation law enforcement system dispute resolution, such as international arbitration, to facilitate the provision of compensation to victims, disempowered by representatives of the state of the justice system of Russia.

Moreover, all of the above corresponds to paragraph 2,3 Art. 1 of the Treaty between the USSR and the Republic of Cyprus on Legal Assistance in Civil and Criminal Matters of 19.01.1984. Thus, A. I. Schmidt has the full right to appeal to international bodies for the protection of the rights and freedoms of a person since he had exhausted all available domestic remedies.

THE COURT FOUND:

…Based on the above, guided by the «Agreement on partnership and cooperation» dated to 24. 06. 1994 between the Russian Federation and the EU, and the Additional Protocol thereto, ratified in accordance with the Federal law of Russia from 05 November 2004. No. 130-FL, part 4 of article 15, article 46 of the Russian Constitution and its own Regulations, the International Commercial Arbitration Court at the International Committee of the Protection of property (Larnaca, Cyprus) came to the conclusion about the need to make the FINAL DECISION on the established facts:

Recognize the legal fact that Vladislav Kvasov and Vladimir Mits were shareholders of the company «Dastin GmbH» from 28.09.1999, which is confirmed by the certificates of the company valued at 100,000 (one hundred thousand) US dollars, issued in their name and registered in the register of shareholders with the Registrar of the company Dastin Handelshaus AG (Luxembourg).

Recognize the legal fact that the presented by Kvasov receipts in the Central District Court of Tyumen the Russian Federation in case No. 2-1649/2004 (judge Agafonova V.) reflected the relationship between Vladislav Kvasov, Vladimir Mits and the company Dastin GmbH on behalf of Alexey Schmidt and Franz Schmidt, arising from their joint arrangements in relation to the equity in the company Dastin GmbH to finance the subsidiary in Russia – CJSC «Enterprise with foreign investments «DastinMarktet».

Thus, a foreign judgment has proved that Kvasov, who presented the copies of the receipts on the alleged loan in court is a forger, and Agafonova, to put it mildly, made an illegal judicial act. This Decision of the Tribunal and certified copies of documents from the accounting Department of a foreign company were sent to all law enforcement agencies of the Russian Federation and the Prosecutor General, who immediately forwarded them to Tyumen regional Prosecutor. The results are all known. As the trial of A. Schmidt in Tyumen continues, no one thought to send the case back for further investigation or to do something within the Law. It is clear that the cuffs are not going to be put on Agafonova, since it is their own private Corporation. Although she is dismissed, Alexey Schmidt is still haunted. It has come to an anecdotal situation, the judge Sudarkina sends to the island of Cyprus these emails:

The court indicates that the criminal proceedings against you are suspended, due to the fact that the court cannot consider the received petition, since when addressing the specified petition, You did not state:

Whether you agree to the commencing of the criminal proceedings in your absence , either the termination of the criminal case against you in connection with the expiration of the statute of limitations for criminal responsibility , or the termination of the criminal proceedings in connection with the Resolution of the State Duma Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation «on amnesty in connection with the 70th anniversary of the Victory in the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945. «, You have also failed to appear in court before the criminal proceedings.

The Central District Court of Tyumen wishes to know whether you agree to the commencing of the criminal proceedings in your absence , either the termination of the criminal case against you in connection with the expiration of the statute of limitations for criminal responsibility , or the termination of the criminal proceedings in connection with the Resolution of the State Duma Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation «on amnesty in connection with the 70th anniversary of the Victory in the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945. »

The signature of the Judge Shaderkina I.U

[/toggles]

Where in the world will you see such correspondence between the judge and the defendant, where a choice of a sentencing type is offered? Only in Tyumen! I sympathize the judge Shaderkina: on the one hand, it is necessary to execute the task ordered by the portraits posted at the beginning of this article, on the other hand, she does not want to take a sin and condemn an innocent soul! The case now contains the complete evidence of fraud committed by Kvasov in collusion with judge Agafonova, and the falsification of the criminal case by the hands of the bailiffs and the investigative Department of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation in Tyumen, Voronin. Nevertheless, no one brings the case back for investigation in connection with the re-opened and new circumstances or to cease it by the «Statute of limitations». Why is the case still being treated illegally? Ay, Mr. Ogoreltsev! Are we saving Vera Afganova again?

Expert opinion

Professor Evgeny Myslovsky noted in his book «State and justice»:

«…Today, the controversial question remains about the success of judicial reform in the Russian Federation. There are various criterias of success of the reform and effective functioning of the judicial system. This official assessment of the management of higher courts practically coincides with the views of the representatives of the legal community, differs significantly from the population’s estimation. The results of sociological surveys show that the attitude of the Russian citizens to the institution of the court remains sceptical, sometimes even negative. The society expresses its doubts about the impartiality, accessibility and effectiveness of courts. According to the survey, the citizens have formed the belief that judges make decisions not following the law, (13.7% of responses to a corresponding question) but are primarily oriented to money (54,4%), defying the pressure of authorities (30,7%) reflect the social status of the Respondent (23,8%), their impunity for incorrectly made decisions (18,7%), the threat of crime (17.3%) and more. The experts in a similar estimation were less categorical, but also placed money in first place among the factors of influence on the judges in making their judicial decisions.

These processes are quite natural within judicial corporations, the condition represents a destruction of traditional state control and lack of monitoring by the companies.

How is it that by ensuring the independence of the courts by the local administrators, we received a judiciary independent not only from public opinion but from the law?!

On the basis of an utopian-liberal presumption of independence of the judiciary as an independent branch of government, any control over consideration of complaints to actions of investigators and judges was excluded from the jurisdiction of that law in general.

As a result, we have created some «sacred cows» — we received an investigation and a trial, which became independent not so much from the other branches of government, but also from the law.

… The absence of complaints is a direct evidence that the judicial decision at least formally satisfied the requirements of all participants at the process. Therefore, the verdict or the decision can be argued to be probably fair. If the judicial decision of the regional arbitration court and the regional Prosecutor’s office (for example, the case of a resident of Tyumen Alexey Schmidt, of which the international journal of «OBJECTIVE» in 2013 — 2014 wrote in almost every issue!) shall be appealed before the Supreme official of the state (President) Yes 39 (!) again, isn’t that a reason for the intervention of the Supreme court? What was the reaction of the Supreme court? The Supreme court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme arbitration court simply forwarded the appeal sent to the Presidential office. They treated it exactly in the same way as other state bodies, sent it “down,» i.e., sent it to those exact courts, the decisions of which created the problem in the first place. And there, in most cases based on corporate, and even criminal-clan interests, they simply refuse to consider the case, thus creating the notorious «stability of judicial practice».

… This result has been achieved gradually, by reforming the main provisions of the previous laws: the institute of the Prosecutor’s protest against judicial decision was eliminated, this entering into force, has sharply reduced the role of the prosecutors and the level of protection of human rights; introduced in 2011, the ban on filing a Supervisory appeal after a certain time from the moment the sentence is legally enforced; certain norm was seized out of the code of criminal procedure, the earlier rule that the Prosecutor and the investigator are also required to collect proof of innocence of the accused; granted the right to judge, considering a Supervisory appeal to complaint collegial body of law to resolve the merits of the application; eliminated the possibility of personal reception of the applicant by the head of the judicial authority in case of refusal of the court of Supervisory instance in the complaint.

Part 2 of article 11 of the Federal law No. 59-FL of 02 may 2006 «On the procedure of consideration of citizens of the Russian Federation”, knocked out the last hope that the citizens had in trying to reach true justice: «the Appeal, which appealed the court decision, be returned to the citizen making the appeal, explaining the procedure of appeal against this court decision».

All statements of the citizens on the misconduct of judges began to fall under this article with elements of the crimes provided under articles 285, 286, 292, 293, 303, 305 Criminal code of the Russian Federation –abuse of power; falsification of evidence; forgery; negligence; making a knowingly unjust sentence, decision or other judicial act. This legislative innovation has completely withdrawn the judicial investigation system from the public control, which greatly affected the possibility of recovery of the violated rights of the citizens through the revision of decisions, sentences and other judicial acts on newly discovered, significant for the case circumstances (paragraphs 1, 2, 3, part 2 of article 392 of the RF CPC), and therefore, it became almost impossible to prove the guilt of the judges.

Since that time the investigative bodies and the Prosecutor’s office began to return the statements to the citizens who complained about the misconduct of judges, including the judges making knowingly unjust sentences, decisions and other judicial acts, because it all comes down to the appeal of the judgment or the expression of disagreement with court’s decision. It is now impossible to bring a complain related to judges, and so the judges are irresponsible to impose unjust sentences, decisions and other judicial acts. Moreover, they began to refuse the verification of statements and to initiate criminal cases against other participants in the process, as it could leave a stain on the judges, and also against illegal actions or inaction of officials criminal investigators, prosecutors who carried out checks on the applications of citizens, where at least indirectly, involved judges.

And in the framework of this article, citizen’s rights are being taken away by administrative force: one can no longer appeal where illegal actions of investigators and judges is taking place. The deprivation of citizen’s rights is committed in small pieces, but immediately in all directions.

On 26 December 2006, by the order of the General Prosecutor of Russian Federation Y. Y. Chaika the instruction No. 120 was approved «On order of consideration of appeals and reception of citizens in bodies of Prosecutor’s office of the Russian Federation» No. 120.

Paragraph 2.4 of this Instruction has decreed: «Appeals (requests), in which the applicants disagree with the decision and therefore put the issue of bringing judges and prosecutors to justice, expressing an assumption about the possible Commission of crimes, in the absence of data on the characteristics of the crime, do not require verification in the manner prescribed by article 144 and 145 of the criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation».

1 Aug 2007 — decree of the President of the Russian Federation V. V. Putin No. 1004 for distinguishing between the investigative and oversight functions of prosecution bodies of the Russian Federation establishes the ICR (Investigative Committee of Russia). The main task is to protect the rights and freedoms of persons and citizens.

In fact, the officials of the Prosecutor General no longer bear any responsibility for malfeasance and criminal inaction of the officials, since they are simply supervised, and it became possible for them to perform miracles of procedural chaos, the result of which became crucial to ordinary citizens and businessmen who fell victim to the instructions from ABOVE, or refused to pay a «tribute» to the prosecutors and investigators for «protection» or for the performance of their official duties. For improper supervision, there is almost no responsibility!

It is during these times when the gangs began to disappear in all the country’s regions, starting with Moscow and St. Petersburg, and all their «undercovering» by public and private entities began to move under the «protection» of prosecutors. For an example, there is no need to look further, the prosecutors of the Moscow region, appeared on the backing of a gambling business, this is a vivid proof of that.

On 7 September 2007, by Order No. 14 of the First Deputy Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation the Chairman of the ICR, A. I. Bastrykin, the instruction of the ICR «On the procedure of reception, registration and check of messages on crimes in the system of ICR No. 14 was introduced, in which the following is stated: «received by the investigative body of the ICR treatment, in which the petitioners Express disagreement with the decisions taken by judges, prosecutors, heads of investigation bodies and investigators, and therefore put the issue of bringing them to justice, expressing an assumption about the possible Commission of specified persons malfeasance, in the absence of data on signs of the crime, do not require verification in the manner prescribed by article 144 and 145 of the criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation». (The fourth paragraph of paragraph 33 of the Statement of the ICR No. 14).

Now, the ICR has even protected its officers from citizen’s appeals on crimes and criminal inaction of officials, giving the investigators the opportunity to irresponsibly perform illegal instructions or make decisions that are «more beneficial». The decision of the Supreme court of the Russian Federation dated 13.01.2010 № ГКПИ09-1542, entered into force 11.03.2010 ,the court order of the armed forces of the Russian Federation No. КАС10-68, the fourth subparagraph of paragraph 33 of the Statement of SC of the Russian Federation shall be recognized and enforced.

On 17 December 2007, by the Order of the General Prosecutor of Russia, Y. Y. Chaika ,instruction No. 200 «On order of consideration of appeals and reception of citizens in the prosecution system of the Russian Federation» was introduced. Paragraph 2.4 of the instructon of the GP of the Russian Federation No. 200: «Appeals in which the petitioners Express disagreement with the decisions and therefore put the issue of bringing judges, prosecutors, investigators, interrogating officers or other persons responsible, expressing an assumption about the possible Commission of crimes, in the absence of specific data on the characteristics of the crime, do not require verification in the manner prescribed by article 144 and 145 of the criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation».

On 29 December 2009 — the Federal law of the Russian Federation No. 383 — FL «On amendments to part I of the Tax code of the Russian Federation and certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation introduced an amendment to the article 90 of the Criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation : «the facts established by a legally effective verdict or otherwise enforceable by a court decision adopted in civil, arbitration or administrative proceedings recognized by the court, Prosecutor, investigator, inquirer without additional verification». Thus, the circumstances established in the civil and arbitration courts, even on the basis of false, unjust solutions, are no longer checked by the judges, investigators, prosecutors and interrogators, which gives additional opportunities to the officials in denying citizens the proper inspection related to allegations of misconduct of judges.

By the decision of the constitutional court of the Russian Federation dated 15.07.2008, № 446-O-O article 90 of the criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation in the new edition shall be recognized as legal.

21 Jul 2010 – in a letter to the High Qualification Board of judges № ВКК-ИП 389/10, signed by its Chairman, Vladimir Kuznetsov, paragraph 8 States: «the relevant qualification Board of judges does not consent to the initiation of criminal proceedings against a judge under article 305 of the criminal code (court’s passing a knowingly unjust sentence, decision or other judicial act), if issued judicial act by the judges is not repealed or changed by a higher Tribunal as unjust».

In short, making a knowingly unjust sentence, decision or other judicial act, which is the subject of judge – the liability of a judge could possibly arise only after this fact is established by a court decision, which, in turn, is possible only after the judicial qualification Board of judges will agree for the investigating Commitee to initiate a criminal case against the judge, then the indictment must be received for approval by the Prosecutor, then the case should be considered by the court and only after the sentence comes into legal force, perhaps, the qualification Board will give its consent to prosecution of judges. Thus, creating the conditions for the withdrawal of judges from the criminal liability under article 305 of the criminal code was brought to a legal absurdity.»

Who and against whom does it protect? Insights, dear reader, make them yourself!

… «The next example, we take from Tyumen. International journal «Objective» from room to room analysed the situation that has lasted for more than a decade, of a conflict between the inhabitant of the Tyumen region ,Alexey Schmidt, and the regional judicial system, when all its allegations of gross violations by the Deputy Chairman of the arbitration court Loskutov and Federal judges Agafonova, have been rejected, on the grounds that their decisions have entered into legal force.

The admitted violations, of judge Agafonova for instance, are, as they say, on the surface and do not require any expert studies: she acknowledged the loan agreement is not clear , the conditions under which the data appeared in several copies (not originals!) of the receipts did not seem right. Anyone even a novice lawyer knows that a receipt is not a loan agreement. For «converting» it into a contract, the document must specify not only the amount of debt and its validity, but the obligations to the lender and some other important provisions.

The representative of the defendant by attorney at the hearing did not recognize the claim, explaining that he personally did not know anything about the origin of these receipts, and the defendant was never called. In vain, Alexey Schmidt pointed out, in all the complaints, that the receipts do not indicate what and when the defendant must return, also other essential terms of the contract were absent.

The loan agreement between the parties was not concluded. In accordance with the provisions of article 810 CC of the Russian Federation, the borrower is obliged to return the lender the loan amount received on time and in the manner provided for in the loan agreement. According to p. 1 art. 432 CC the contract is considered concluded if the parties, in the required form, reached an agreement on all essential terms of the contract, and the plaintiff has submitted a receipt for a transaction, not having a recognisable written form of the loan agreement (not met the essential terms of the loan agreement), did not possess contained information about the obligations of the defendant to the plaintiff on payment of the required cash amounts and not supported by the opinion parties of the loan agreement. The issued receipts are a completely different matter. In vain, Schmidt appealed to the superior judges to check the circumstances under which the judge Agafonova assured these copies of the receipts, the validity of which is neither mentioned in the transcript of the hearing or in the petition brought by Kvasov. A. Schmidt was constantly denied in the appeal of the case on the grounds that he missed the deadline to appeal the decision of the court and the decision has already entered into force.

The problem lies in the evasion of the prosecution in producing checks of numerous complaints brought by A. Schmidt on the grounds that the prosecution has no right of supervision over the decisions of civil disputes. However, in the claim, the question was raised about the violations by judges and false statements, thus the court wrongfully treated the claims. There is another oddity: normally the application addressed wrongfully, according to the Prosecutor’s office or investigative Committee, must be forwarded accordingly to a certain jurisdiction, as explicitly stated in the sixth paragraph of clause 20 of ISC of the Russian Federation No. 72 dated 11.10.2012: «In response to the statement, or appeal, which the applicant suggested to be an unjust court decision, the applicant may exercise his right to appeal in the order established by the legislation of the Russian Federation, the appeal shall be addressed to a higher judicial authority or the Prosecutor’s office». Nevertheless, none claims addressed to the Prosecutor’s office and the investigative Committee of the Tyumen region by A. Schmidt were not forwarded to the court. A simple question is asked: if the complaint alleges that the judges violated the judicial process, should not this be one reason to review the judgment? The position of the Tyumen court was not even affected by the decision of the International commercial arbitration, which established that Kvasov had a share in a foreign company and the issued money to Schmidt, was a mere payment for the shares. But, as we have noted, the court does not hand over its Corporation!

The Book Of E. N. Myslovsky. Contemporary problems of justice: the structural-systemic crisis, or the human factor?

If we go back to the beginning of this whole Saga of the confrontation of Alexey Schmidt with the regional law enforcement agencies, we will see that the basis of conflict of Alexey Schmidt with almost all branches of the judiciary in the Tyumen region lies within the materials of another long-suffering criminal case on the embezzlement of a branch of Khanty-Mansiysk Bank by bankers of the Tyumen region, more than 35 million rubles were taken. This theft was discovered by A. Schmidt, the circumstances of such discovery resulted in a well-planned, organized economic attack on Schmidt’s business. This vile attack was supported by the entire law enforcement system of the Tyumen region, with which Alexey Schmidt is still fighting now for more than ten years.

The seizure of property from the rightful owner using various “legal” arrangements in the early years of this century were just beginning to bloom. The term «raiding» was only being included in the «business» of trafficking at that time, and the process where «the state, represented by a certain circle of officials and bodies» was only beginning its transposition into the administrative structure. And here, in regard to Khanty-Mansiysk Bank, the scheme was not an original one. It should be noted that the Chairman of the Board of Directors of Bank of Khanty-Mansiysk at that time was Governor of the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous district, Mr. Filipenko (now auditor of the accounts chamber of the Russian Federation). And when the long struggle between the Bank and CJSC «DastinMarket» began, a wide use of the raider mechanism incepted , the so-called «judicial and administrative resources».

Thank you, Yevgeny Myslovsky for the informative book about the death of judicial system in Russia. Now, let us return to the Tyumen clan of corrupt officials.

The Tyumen Krakens

In front of me is the decision of the International Arbitration court at the International Committee for property protection, case No. r ICAC-7/11/14 dated to 08.03.2016. «On Compensation for economic damage — the amount of compensation of expropriated direct investments and lost profits». The defendants are: the Russian Federation, Public joint-stock company «Khanty-Mansiysk Bank Open», self-regulating organization — non-profit partnership «Siberian Guild of crisis managers» (SGAU) and the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg.

It is a song! Throughout 80 sheets, the illegal activities of government officials and judges in Tyumen region are compactly stowed, these are clearly motivated criminal actions of an organized group. Only some extracts of the Decision shall be provided, but you need to remember that in its native country, the entrepreneur A. Schmidt and foreign investors went through 47 court hearings, trying to protect themselves from traffickers in power and corrupt officials, acting on behalf of Bank of Khanty-Mansiysk. Some of the court hearings in Russia were won, including a number of cases, where the government is obliged to fully restore the enterprise with foreign investments, including EGRUL and even issued a writ of execution. But these court decisions have not been enforced, the bailiff did not even consider presenting the writ of execution to the state registration authority for its enforcement. What kind of laws and enforceability of judicial decisions in Russia can be discussed when there is a regional mafia controlling the situation?

The Arbitrator of the ICAC has established: «… In accordance with the information of activities of the Russian Federation No. 462182 from 03.12.2012, provided by LLC «enquiry service of legal entities», the authorized capital of CJSC «DastinMarket» at the date of 01.03.2003 amounted to 252000,00 231 rubles (two hundred thirty-one million two hundred fifty two thousand rubles) to (UAH 2037200595397) (85-93 fact sheet case No. 1), on what basis the arbitrator of the ICAC made a conclusion about the absence of signs of bankruptcy, since assets and fixed assets greatly exceeded the amount of the tax arrears, presented by the RF Tax Authority № 4 of the Tyumen city, and in fact (de facto) are the redeemed goods seized by the bailiffs of Tyumen. Further concerted actions of state bodies of Russia and the Tyumen region and Arbitral court served as a cover for the expropriation of the property of the plaintiffs in favour of the Bank with state participation of JSC Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» and the subsequent liquidation of CJSC «DastinMarket» without the will of the owners-the shareholders. The criminal component of these actions will not be considered since it is beyond the scope of this arbitration due to the competence.

… In 06.02.2004, by the judge of the Arbitration Court of the Tyumen region, Loskutov V. V. requirements were set to the creditor — OJSC «Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» (case № A70-7994/3-2003). The Lender in behalf of the JSC «Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» did not comply with the claim resolving procedure set in Russian Federation. As follows from the contents of paragraph 4 , as of the motivational Court order of Arbitrational court of the Tyumen region dated to 06.02.2004 in the case of A70-7994/3-2003, as well as from the operative part of the court order, the court has not replaced the representative as supposed to according the order of procedural succession in accordance with article 48 APC RF (169-171 fact sheet case No. 1).In addition, gross violations of the Federal constitutional law «About the introduction in action of the APC», the office of the court of arbitration has also flagrantly violated the rules of the court proceedings, in adopting and referring to the case A70-7994/2003, the statement from JSC «Bank of Khanty-Mansiysk, registration in the office of the court and the consideration by the general rules of courts (article 125 of the APC). That is, the court in the face of the judge V. Loskutov, with the office of the court of arbitration and representatives of the inadequate creditors have committed acts in violation of section 4 art. 163 of the APC, thus once again braking the rules of the claim proceedings set in the Russian Federation, «About introduction in action of the APC», the introduction of the FCL «On the judicial system in Russia». The commitment of these unlawful actions led to serious non-legal consequences for the plaintiffs in this case and for the enterprise of CJSC «Dastin Market», which was reflected in the court proceedings, where the judicial session was appointed on the establishment of requirements by «LK «HELSING» ltd, the judgment was held in favor of a party — CJSC Khanty-Mansiysk Bank». There was an unjustified conclusion made about the presence of the alleged «rights» on mortgagee owed by JSC Khanty-Mansiysk Bank», in respect of the immovable assets of CJSC «EFI «DastinMarket» to a pledge agreement dated to 31.08.2001 . The arbitrator notes that the rights of the mortgagee under the mortgage in Russia is subject to state registration and is determined by the corresponding entry in the state register of rights to immovable property and are approved by the respective extract from the state registry (article 131 of the RF Civil Code, the provisions of the Federal Law on state registration of rights to immovable property and transactions therewith of 21.07.1997 № 122-FL as amended.).

The details of the evidence were not presented by the OJCS Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» in Arbitral court, and subsequently, the requested and received by CJSC «Dastin Market» extract from the state register confirms that the person acting in behalf of OJCS Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» as the mortgagee is not registered in the registry (extract from the Unified state register of rights to immovable property and transactions with it No. 30/2004-314 from 24.02.2004, 409-410 fact sheet case No. 8). Based on the above, it follows that the conclusion about the presence of right of mortgagee possessed by OJCS Khanty-Mansiysk Bank in relation of the debtor’s immovable property are contrary to the provisions of article 131 of the civil code and resulted in a violation of the provisions of article 134,138 FL of the Russian Federation «On insolvency (bankruptcy)».

As of 02.03.2004, Schmidt A. I. filed the appeal in Federal Arbitration court Western-Siberian district, the decision of the Arbitration court of the Tyumen region dated 06.02.2004 on the establishment of requirements of OJSC «Khanty-Mansiysk Bank». Simultaneously with the appeal, an application was made to adjourn the first meeting of creditors, which is, of course, invalid. This petition was delivered to the office of the Arbitration Court of Tyumen region also in 02.03.2004, but was considered by the court that there was no violation of art. 159 (396-399, 593 volume No. 8), limiting the opportunities for those involved in the case to effectively and fully represent and protect their rights and interests ,thus a procedural discrimination was admitted, which is directly prohibited by the procedural law and part 3 of article 56 of the Constitution.

As of 05.04.2004, the cassation complaint of CJSC «DastinMarket», filed by the Director A. Shmidt, was considered by Federal Arbitration court Western-the Siberian district. The establishment of requirements of OJSC «Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» has been repealed, the case A70-7994/3-2003 was directed to a new consideration to a court of the first instance — Arbitration Court of Tyumen region with the replacement of the composition of the court (cases 19-21 fact sheet No. 2).

In the court order for the clarification of the court of appeal in case number F04/1780-251/A70-2004) dated to 26.05.2004, the Federal arbitration court of the Western-the Siberian district has indicated that the administrator must proceed according to the lack of legal basis for finding the claims of OJSC «Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» in the register of creditors that was wrongfully ignored by the bankruptcy Trustee Y. Shabalina at carrying out of procedure of bankruptcy of CJSC «EFI «DastinMarket», as well the judge of the Arbitration court of the Tyumen region V. Loskutov.

… The arbitration court of Tyumen region in the court order of 06.02.2004 in the case № A70-7994/2003 did not give a legal assessment to the statement of LLC «Leasing company «HELSING» on its replacement in the order of procedural succession for CJSC Khanty-Mansiysk Bank, and did not substantiate the procedure by which such conduct was allowed , however, it has factually satisfied the decision, as provided in the statement.

… Based on the above, according to the procedure succession and consideration of statements of OJSC «Bank of Khanty-Mansiysk» for its recognition as a creditor , the Arbitration court of Tyumen region has committed procedural violations under Chapter 28 of APC RF, part 3 of article 28, articles 54, 68 and 71 of the Federal Law «On insolvency (bankruptcy)», as OJSC Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» are also subject to the requirements of this law in the procedure of appeal to the arbitration court for recognition of the competitive creditor in the bankruptcy case.

As of 05.05.2004 ,in case no F04/1780-251/A70-2004 (in the first instance A70-7994/3-2003) the Federal arbitration court of West Siberian district made a decision about cancellation of court order of Arbitrational court of the Tyumen region dated 06.02.2004, where the OJSC “Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» was recognized as the competitive creditor with the size of creditor claims amounting to 123 288101,00 roubles (l. d. 126-128 vol 1). As a result, OJSC «Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» had to be excluded from the number of creditors on the bankruptcy case of CJSC «Dastin Market». However, the decision on the introduction of bankruptcy proceedings and the recognition of CJSC «Dastin Market» in accordance with article 12 of the Federal law «On insolvency (bankruptcy)» bankruptcy was made with the participation of the creditor of OJSC «Khanty-Mansi Bank», as having a right to vote in the amount of 94,99% (79-58 volume L. D. No. 6) and was taken a judicial act of the arbitration court of Tyumen region from 18.03.2004 (case A70-7994/2003).

Despite the measures taken by the management of CJSC «Dastin Market», in 03.03.2004 the interim Manager of SSAU, Y. Vasiliev–Chebotaryov held the first meeting of creditors of CJSC «Enterprise with foreign investments «Dastin Market». At this meeting, the report of the interim manager was adopted and the introduction of bankruptcy proceedings in respect of CJSC «Dastin Market” was voted. The decision was made with regard to the representatives of OJSC «Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» (subject to 94.99 percent of the votes of the creditors according to the interim Manager Protocol and the magazine of registration of participants of meeting of creditors of CJSC «Dastin Market») and the “ТО ФСФО” of Russia in the Tyumen region (including 4,94% of the votes of the creditors). The participants of the meeting creditors were as follows: Baskova S. V., acting under a power of attorney of JSC «Bank of Khanty-Mansiysk» №76-06/04-03-1 from 26.01.2004 and the representative of territorial authority of “ТО ФСФО” of Russia for Tyumen region Degtyareva N. N., acting under power of attorney dated 12.01.2004 (49-58 fact sheet case No. 6).

The cassation appeal of A. Shmidt to the decision dated to 06.02.2004, according to the provisions of section 1, 2 article 275 of the Arbitration remedial code of the Russian Federation, was sent to Federal Arbitration court of the Western-Siberian district with the material of the case A70-7994/3-2003. A hearing on the appeal was scheduled to 05.04.2004. Therefore, in accordance with the Russian arbitration procedural legislation all the case materials A70-7994/3-2003 were sent to the court of cassation. In addition, as of 12.03.2004, from the date of the publication (in the «Rossiyskaya Gazeta» № 50 dated to 12.03.2004 ) of the presidential Decree No. 314 dated to 09.03.2004 «On the system and structure of Federal Executive authorities» of ФСФО of the Russian Federation was abolished (paragraph 12 of the Decree). Functions to represent the interests of the Russian Federation before creditors in bankruptcy proceedings transferred to the Federal tax service (issue14 of the Decree).

However, despite these circumstances, in the absence of all case materials A70-7994/3-2003 in the first instance, 18.03.2004, the judge of Arbitration Court of the Tyumen region V. Loskutov has reviewed and rendered a decision on the introduction of bankruptcy proceedings in respect of CJSC «Enterprise with foreign investments «DastinMarket» and on appointment of a the bankruptcy Trustee Y. G. Shabalin from the SSAU guild, relying solely on his own unenforceable and illegal judicial act dating to 06.02.2004 made in the interest and for the benefit of a party to the bankruptcy case, the improper creditor — OJSC «Khanty — Mansi Bank», an act made with rough violations of the current at the time legislation, including procedural rules and substantive law against the plaintiffs in this case and their property — existing enterprise CJSC «DastinMarket».The decision dated to 18.03.2004, the Tribunal judges V. Loskutova in the case of A70-7994/3-2003 were subject to immediate execution (396-399 fact Sheet case No. 8), which contradicted the prevailing at the time legislation of the Russian Federation, since in accordance with article 150 APC RF, the case was subject to termination in connection with the liquidation of ФСФО of the Russian Federation (the applicant about the initiation of bankruptcy proceedings) by the decree of the Russian President No. 314 from 09.03.2004.

… In the future, A. Schmidt (as the Director, as the owner of 1% of the shares, as the representative of foreign shareholders-investors) had not been notified neither by the court nor the bankruptcy Trustee Y. Shabalina, he was not involved in conducting the inventory of property of the enterprise. Shareholder approval for large transactions with enterprise property was not given. The property of CJSC «Dastin Market» was sold with no real trades and no real market assessment. Moreover, the shareholder, the Director and representative of shareholders A. Schmidt was not allowed to get acquainted with the materials of the case of the Arbitration court of the Tyumen region A70-7994/3-2003. All written complaints and petitions to the judge V. Loskutov, the illegal actions of the bankruptcy Trustee Shabalin, remained pending in the court.

On the basis of the application of the lawyer S. Bastovoi (who is also the head of the legal Department of the Tyumen branch of OJSC «Bank of Khanty-Mansiysk» and the representative of the bankruptcy Trustee Y. Shabalin under the power of attorney) A. Schmidt, as the sole Executive body of CJSC «EFI»Dastin Market», was slandered by the consent of the Prosecutor of the Central administrative district of the city of Tyumen, a criminal case No. 200403835/14 was filed under article 30, 159, 196 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (sheet 10-14 vol 2), making it difficult for A. Schmidt in regard to activities connected with the protection of property of foreign shareholders and his own property.

The Arbitrator of the ICAC has established on the basis of the enclosed evidence that in the exercise of its powers under the bankruptcy proceedings, Trustee Yuriy Shabalin has not made entries in the register, that he did get the powers of the sole Executive body of CJSC «Dastin Market», contrary to article 129 of the Federal law «On insolvency (bankruptcy)». In fact, in a public register, information that the company is headed by the sole Executive body — Director A. Schmidt, in respect of whom a criminal case about deliberate bankruptcy of CJSC «Dastin Market» and fraud was filed, so that all could see.

The decision of the judge of the Central district court of Tyumen, Belousova M. Y, from 27.09.2004, the fact of initiating a criminal case against A. I. Schmidt No. 200403835/14 under article 30, 159, 196 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation was declared illegal. As to the resolution article of the investigator (inquirer) of the Investigation Department at MOI of the Central JSC Tyumen, Kolpakovoj S. A. from 10.09.2004 criminal case/criminal prosecution against A. I. Schmidt was terminated on the grounds stipulated by art. 24 part 1 para 2, article 27, part 1, section 1 of the criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation — absence in act of structure of a crime and innocence of the suspect in committing the crime (paragraph 1 of the operative part of the resolution), and as to the procedural coercion- the prohibition of traveling was cancelled by paragraph 2 of the operative part of the decision (case sheet 8-9, 22-31 vol 2).

Schmidt has fought for seven years to earn an apology from the courts and the Prosecutor’s office on behalf of the Russian Federation for the illegal criminal prosecution. On October 2011 the Deputy Prosecutor of the Central JSC Tyumen, A. S. Mokhov ,Ref. no. 135-204 from 28.10.2011 brought an official apology to A. Schmidt in connection with unreasonable criminal prosecution in the criminal case No. 200403835/14 (L. D. volume 10 number 2).

At the same time the claim made by the Director of CJSC «Dastin Market» A. I. Shmidt to the Prosecutor of the Tyumen region dated to 04.03.2004 (104-106 fact sheet case No. 9) for fraud on the part of employees of JSC Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» in contravention of the act was not examined in the due time and CJSC «Enterprise with foreign investments «DastinMarket», in violation of article 2 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation ,was deprived of protection from the raider attacks. The non-legal consequences came that resulted in the wrongful seizure (expropriation) of the property, in particular, the requirements of the state (tax authorities) in tax arrears were not satisfied, due to which allegedly, the process of bankruptcy of large enterprises of Tyumen «Dastin Market» began. In consequence of this statement criminal case No. 200500108/01, the production of which was stopped several times and artificially delayed state law enforcement agencies, and which was never investigated, but then terminated «at the expiration of the Statute of limitations.»

There were numerous violations of the Russian legislation at the bankruptcy proceedings of CJSC «DastinMarket», including: the consideration of one of the A. Schmidt’s complaints on the actions of the bankruptcy Trustee Yuriy Shabalin, the judge of the Arbitration Court of the Tyumen region ,Loskutov, has appointed the hearing on 08.02.2005. On the same day, the judge set a hearing for the review of the completion of bankruptcy proceedings on the bankruptcy of CJSC «Enterprise with foreign investments «DastinMarket», approval of the report of the bankruptcy Trustee Y. Shabalin, without notifying in advance A. Schmidt about the time and date of this trial, thereby depriving the opportunity to review the report of the bankruptcy administrator, to prepare their objections to the report and questions to the administrator. It should be noted that the report of the bankruptcy Trustee was not previously presented to foreign shareholders of «DastinMarket»; and the report on profits and losses; the intermediate and liquidation balance sheets approved by the auditor; the evaluation results and open trades. Thus, the shareholders were deprived of the opportunity to prepare for the process, to familiarize with the case materials (case 432-436 fact sheet No. 6) due to the agreed actions of the judge Loskutov and the head of Arbitration.

The Arbitrator of the ICAC found that in violation of clause 6, article 16, article 134 of the Federal law «On insolvency (bankruptcy)» when setting interim Manager Yuri Vasiliev-Chebotaryov from the SGAU Guild, requirements of enterprise employee salary were not included in the creditor’s requirement— requirements 2 turns, including the requirements of the salary payable to A. Schmidt, the Director of CJSC «Dastin Market».

As of 10.02.2005, the report of the bankruptcy Trustee Shabalin was approved by the judge of the Arbitration Court of the Tyumen region V. Loskutov, bankruptcy proceedings A70-7994/3-2003 completed (433-435 fact sheet case No. 6).

Arbitrator of the ICAC has established on the basis of the submitted documents that the request for early consideration of the report of the bankruptcy proceedings of CJSC «Dastin Market», the bankruptcy Trustee Shabalin Y. G. has addressed it to the Arbitration court of the Tyumen region on 18.01.2005 i.e. the next day after a Determination by the judge of the Arbitration court of the Tyumen region V. Loskutov «on preparing the case for trial in the case of A70-7994/3-2003 dated 17.01.2005 » (made in the consideration of the petition of a bankruptcy Trustee on approval of the report of the bankruptcy proceedings and completion of bankruptcy proceedings). This is evidenced by the stamp office of the Tyumen region Arbitrational Court on the petition of a bankruptcy Trustee from 18.01.2005 ex. No. 200 (incl. No. arbitration court of the Tyumen region A70-Со3б-702 from 18.01.2005, the Arbitration court of Tyumen region on the preparation of the case for trial to consider the report of the liquidator dated to 17.01.2005 (431-432 fact sheet case No. 6).

In 10.02.2005, Schmidt A. I. had filed an appeal on the ruling on the completion of bankruptcy proceedings A70-7994/3-2003 to the appellate instance of the Arbitration court of Tyumen region 11.02.2005, filed a petition for interim measures: the prohibition of excepting the CJSC «DastinMarket» from the register based on the court order dated to 10.02.2005 before courts consideration of the appeal.

The Arbitrator of the ICAC has introduced a document to the case certifying that in 14.02.2005 ,at the request of Schmidt’s A. I., by thejudicial act of appeal instance of Arbitration Court of the Tyumen region in the case of A70-79943/2003 were adopted interim measures on the prohibition of exception of CJSC «Enterprise with foreign investments «DastinMarket» from the unified state register of legal entities (EGRUL) before the appeal’s hearing (473-474 fact sheet case No. 6).

In 15.02.2005, A. Schmidt has received and submitted to execution in the registering body of the Inspectorate of “MHC” in the city of Tyumen №3 a writ of execution No. 081531 on the prohibition of exception of CJSC «Enterprise with foreign investments «Dastin Market» from the register until the appeal has been heard (477-478 fact sheet case No. 6). However, despite the judicial ban, the company was excluded from the EGRUL in 15.02.2005 (L. D. 480 volume No. 6), which resulted in the termination of consideration of all submitted by the representative of the shareholders-investors A. Schmidt lawsuits and complaints in Arbitration court of the Tyumen region and Federal Arbitration court Western-Siberian district (L. D. 481-523 fact No. 6).

… Shareholders of a public authority challenged the court on basis of illegal exception of the CJSC from the EGRUL. By the decision of the Arbitration Court of Tyumen region from 17.06.2005, in the case of A70-1693/8-05 the exception of CJSC «Enterprise with foreign investments «DastinMarket», it was established that the exclusion from the register constituted an illegal act. The tax authorities prescribed to restore the full state registration of CJSC «Enterprise with foreign investments «DastinMarket» (129-133 fact sheet case No. 1). As to the appeal and cassation proceedings, despite the complaints of the bankruptcy Trustee Y. Shabalina and registration authority (Inspectorate of Russia in Tyumen № 3), the decision of the Arbitration Court of Tyumen region from 17.06.2005 in the case of A70-1693/8-05 was upheld (case 134-148 fact sheet No. 1).

… In 28.11.2005, the Federal Arbitration court Western-Siberian district has refused and declined the complaint of the Registrar and the bankruptcy Trustee Y. Shabalin and upheld the decision of the Arbitration Court of the Tyumen region dated from 17.06.2005, the case № A70-1693/2005 (on the restoration of the state registration of CJSC «Enterprise with foreign investments «DastinMarket» in the register (L. D. 144-148 vol 1).

…Neither of the filed lawsuits (on invalidation of the underestimated valuation of the property of CJSC «Enterprise with foreign investments «DastinMarket» , on recognising the auction being void, on recognising the collateral being void, on recognising the credit line to be void, about recognition void the arbitration agreement, on the revision of the report of the bankruptcy Trustee and the bankruptcy proceedings in view of the fact that 97 778,79 rubbles raised through the sale of seized goods of «Dastin Market», etc.) were not taken into account, and the case itself was not considered by the courts on the merits at the stated requirements (L. D. 481-523, 587-588 (in Russian) vol 6, L. D. 535-592 vol 8).

In December 2008, after the next (re) statement about the granting of the writ, A. Schmidt succeeded in obtaining a writ of execution for the enforcement of the decision of Arbitration Court of the Tyumen region dated to 17.06.2005 in the case of A70-1693/8-2005. The obtained writ execution was delivered to the bailiff, according to which, the enforcement proceedings No. 71/6/27987/6/2009 (536-542 fact sheet case No. 6) were filed.

In accordance with the provisions of the writ, it was confirmed that the CJSC «DastinMarket» was removed from the register at the Branch No. 1 of the State institution of the Tyumen regional branch of Fund of social insurance of the Russian Federation 10.10.2007 (paragraph 121 of the Statement), and an entry was made in the register without any indication of the person, on the basis of which this the writ was concluded. These events take place almost two years after the wrongful liquidation of CJSC «Dastin Market».

In accordance with the provisions of p. 484-487, the company was re-registered as an Insurance company in the Executive body of Fund of social insurance of the Russian Federation 17.10.2007, and made an entry in EGRUL 2077203579209 without the directions of the person on the basis of whom the writ was concluded.

In accordance with the provisions of p.488-492, after the elimination and exclusion of the CJSC «DastinMarket» from the register, it was re-registered as an insurance company in the territorial body of the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation this is noted in an entry 2087232104331 dated to 19.03.2008.

The provisions of clause 376-379 confirmed that in 02.12.2005 an entry 2057200937869 was made about the company’s registration as insurance company in the territorial Fund of obligatory medical insurance. That is, after 9.5 months after the deregistration (p. 125 of the Statement) from the register, the liquidated company was re-registered as an insurance company in the territorial Fund of medical insurance, and made an entry in EGRUL without instructions of persons, who’s statement acted as the basis of the writ.

As of 22.03.2007 , in accordance with the provisions of the writ, the entry No. 2077203151694 and entry No. 2077203151705 about the information on Bank accounts of CJSC «EFI «Dastin Market» was made (p. 380-383 and 390-393 of the Statement). Thus, for the liquidated and transmitted CJSC «EFI «DastinMarket» bank accounts were re-open in some Bank (or banks), without specifying the name of the Bank, or without the instructions of the person, who’s statement acted as the basis of the produced writ. Since the shareholders were denied by the government of the Russian Federation in providing information about fraud in the state register and in the same way refused to initiate criminal cases on applications of the shareholders for fraud in the state register, the shareholders were deprived of the opportunity to defend themselves in the courts.

The Information about the bankruptcy trustee Shabalin Y. G., appointed on the basis of the decision of the Arbitration court of the Tyumen region was not displayed in the extracts from the register during the bankruptcy period. Only after the liquidation and after more than 3 years have passed, the information about Shabalin Y. G. as the liquidator of the company CJSC «EFI «DastinMarket» was made in too the registration authority of Inter-regional Inspectorate of Tax authority of Russia No. 14 of the Tyumen region according to the certificate of incorporation of CJSC «DastinMarket» No. 5295 from 24.03.2008 onwards (p. 335-370 Statement).

The information about the dismissal of the Director, A. Shmidt was not reflected in the register, as evidenced by the statements of CJSC «DastinMarket» from 30.08.2005, 24.06.2005, 26.10.2005 and from 24.03.2008, since these statements were registered by the Inspection of the Russian Tax Authority across Tyumen № 3 (and in 2008 a successor inter-regional inspection № 14 Tyumen region) in the column «Information about the physical persons, having the right without the power of attorney to act on behalf of a legal entity» specified Director Shmidt Aleksey Iosifovich (L. D. 568-584 vol 6). Thus, the official state information for public use confirmed that Schmidt A. I. is responsible for all activities of the enterprise, since he was listed as a person having the right without the power of attorney to act on behalf of the company.

According to the issued by the registering authority Statement about the activities of CJSC «EFI «Dastinmarket» from 24.06.2005, 30.08.2005 , 26.10.2005, 24.03.2008, 03.12.2012, the adopted interim measure in relation to the prohibition of exception of CJSC «EFI «DastinMarket» of the Arbitration court was not reflected in the Unified state register of legal entities, despite the submitted documents to the registration authority by Schmidt A. – Inspection FTS of Russia across Tyumen № 3 (L. D. 568-584 vol. 6, 85-93 fact sheet case No. 1):

— 14.02.2005 (incl. number FTS In Tyumen No. 3 7922 from 14.02.2005) the court decision of the Arbitration court of Tyumen region about interim measures in the case of A70-7994/3-2003 from 14.02.2005, where the court determined «to Prohibit the registration authority – Inspection FTS of Russia across Tyumen № 3 to make a registry entry on the liquidation of CJSC «DastinMarket» on the basis of the court order of the Arbitration court of the Tyumen region dated to 10.02.2005 on the completion of the bankruptcy proceedings against CJSC «DastinMarket» until the appeal instance of Arbitration court of the Tyumen region on the appeal complaint to court order dated to 10.02.2005, on the completion of the bankruptcy proceedings against CJSC «DastinMarket» in the case of A70-7994/3-2003, — 15.02.2005 (Ref.№ investigation FTS in Tyumen № 3 8143 from 15.02.2005 year) writ of execution the Arbitration court of Tyumen region № 081531 from 15.02.2005.

In the case A70-1693/8-2005, registered by the authority on the request of the judge Koryakovtseva, the registration file was submitted regarding CJSC “Dastin Market” No. 14-82 843328.

The case contains only 35 pages (confirmed by Protocol of the court session on the case of A70-1693/8-05 from 15.06.2005 L. D. 586 vol 6), whereas according to the reply of the Federal tax service of Russia for Tyumen region Ref. no. 11-36/6026 dated to 25.05.2005 at the request of the representative of the shareholders, A. Schmidt, «registration file CJSC «EFI «DastinMarket» was transferred to IFTS of Russin for the Tyumen region at 395 (three hundred and ninety-five) sheets (registration number 7742.16.4)» (L. D. 585 vol 6).

The repeated falsification of the records in the state register ERGUL, without the knowledge of the true owners of the CJSC «EFI «Dastinmarket», foreign shareholders, the void execution of court decisions in Russia on the restoration of «full» registration of the enterprise in the register, directly indicates the involvement of the state registering body in the obstruction of economic activities and the destruction of the enterprise to conceal the actually held expropriation of foreign property in Russia.

The unlawful decisions of the Arbitration court of the Tyumen region, in particular, the arbitrator and Vice-Chairman of arbitration court of the Tyumen region V. Loskutov has covered the relevant law component of the fictitious bankruptcy of CJSC «Enterprise with foreign investments «DastinMarket».

… The arbitrator of the ICAC emphasizes: the courts in the Russian Federation have totally ignored the Federal law dated 09.07.1999 No. 160-FL «On foreign investments in the Russian Federation», which guarantees for the settlement of disputes arising in connection with the implementation of the investment. They have an important meaning, such legal guarantees represent one of the most important means of realizing all the other types of guarantees provided to foreign investors. The Russian government by the provisions of part 4 of art. 15 of the Russian Constitution guarantees that «commonly Recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of the Russian Federation are a component part of its legal system. If an international Treaty of the Russian Federation stipulates other rules than those stipulated by law, the rules of the international Treaty prevail.» Thus, the dispute of the foreign investor, arisen in connection with the implementation of investment and entrepreneurial activities on the territory of the Russian Federation is permitted in accordance with the international treaties signed by the Russian Federation.

Meanwhile, numerous trials in Russia of the plaintiffs ‘ attempts to defend their rights as foreign investors, owners of CJSC «Enterprise with foreign investments «Dastinmarket»» have not met the application of the Agreement between the USSR and the governments of the Kingdom of Belgium and the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg on 09.02.1989 «On mutual encouragement and mutual protection of investments» in the judiciary of Russia.

… 5.4. Damage

As a result of the violations by the Defendants of the current legislation of the Russian Federation, international treaties and conventions, Plaintiffs have suffered economic damages in the amount of 52 261 873,00 Euros, calculated in accordance with an expert opinion dated to 13.01.2015, as follows:

— The market value of the property complex of CJSC «Enterprise with foreign investments «DastinMarket» as of 25.11.2014 the amount in total would have been 333 19 000 (Nineteen million three hundred thirty-three thousand) euros.

— Cost (100% shareholding) of the company CJSC «Enterprise with foreign investments «DastinMarket» as of 17.03.2004 would have amounted up to 4 210 000 (Four million two hundred ten thousand) euros.

— Loss of economic benefits during the period of 25.11.2014 to 17.03.2004 would have been 28 587 000 (Twenty eight million five hundred eighty seven thousand) Euro.

…The arbitrator of the ICAC, on the basis of materials of the Arbitration case A70-7994/3-2003 and A70-7162/18 provided by the plaintiffs, established the illegality of the conclusion of the bankruptcy Trustee Y. G. Shabalina on the property transactions in regard of CJSC” DastinMarket» and the wrongfulness of his actions, including:

not obtaining the consent of the shareholders to conclude a major deal with a part of the building, as evidenced by a letter of management of Federal registration service across the Tyumen region, Khanty-Mansi and Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous districts ex. No. 01-26-005332/08 dated 19.03.2008 to the judge of the Arbitration court of Tyumen region N. Trubichino in the case of A70-7162/18 (460 fact sheet case No. 6);

the illegality of the transaction of the building’s portion without public bidding and market valuation, as required by law (not paying LLC «Defo» (buyer) CJSC «DastinMarket» (seller) of the value of the building at the address, Tyumen, street D. Bednogo, 96, p. 14);

wrongful write-off of the accounts committed by the bankruptcy Trustee, who caused damage not only to the shareholders but also to the state of Russia (the case 461-472 fact sheet No. 6)

understatement of the market value of the assets of the company, the unlawful exclusion from the market and the property valuation of the easement and the rights to lease the land with the privilege of repayment of this site.

… In the present case, the arbitrator of the ICAC found that in the case of CJSC «Enterprise with foreign investments «DastinMarket» the required by the law actions had not been made.

Moreover, the present arbitration case contains:

— A message from the Director of the Department of external relations and trade of administration of the Tyumen region in the name of Vice-Governor of the Tyumen region dated to 03.11.2003, No. 1570/06 (L. D. 94 volume No. 1) that » CJSC «EFI «DastinMarket was created with 99% participation of the foreign investor of the company Dastin Handelshaus AG (Grand Duchy of Luxembourg) and operates for 5 years on the market with the implementation of foreign economic activity and with the establishment of international contacts with partners in Germany, France and Italy. The termination of activity of CJSC «EFI «DastinMarket» will cause the deterioration of the image of the Tyumen region in matters of foreign economic cooperation and investment in enterprises of the Tyumen region. An expert statement was made «about the inexpediency at the present time to initiate bankruptcy proceedings in respect of CJSC «EFI «DastinMarket».

— The letter of the Deputy Head of the city of Tyumen to the Head of Territorial authority of “ФСФО RF» of Russia for Tyumen region dating to03.11.2003, No. 1/2144 (L. D. 95-96 vol 1), which draws attention to the fact that CJSC «EFI «DastinMarket» provides employment for more than 200 people, the amount of current assets as of 01.10.2003 amounted to 42800000,00 rubles, and the company is a socially important enterprise to the economy of the city of Tyumen, so there is no feasibility of initiating bankruptcy proceedings against it.»

Moreover, in cases about bankruptcy of CJSC «EFI «DastinMarket» No A-70-7994/3-2003 of the Arbitration court of the Tyumen region, there is no data confirming the fact of the appeal to the local self-government bodies and Executive authorities of the Russian Federation concerning their views on the bankruptcy of CJSC «EFI «DastinMarket» and the use of competitive procedures prior to the date of the meeting of creditors by the “ФСФО” RF in the Tyumen region. The judges of the Arbitration court of the Tyumen region, in particular, Loskutov, ignored legislative and normative documents, international law and treaties, conventions and didn’t even bother to check the balance sheet of the company CJSC «EFI Dastin Market», reliability of reports of arbitration managers in SSAU Y. Vasilyev-Chebotarev and Y. Shabalina, the standard documents from “ФСФО” RF were not demanded, the certificate of incorporation, which States the amount of the authorized capital and foreign founders-shareholders, did not require a audit Act from “ФСФО” RF in the Tyumen region on the financial viability of the debtor.

Such actions of public bodies are seen as deliberate by the arbitrator of the ICAC, directly contradicting the legislation and normative acts of Russia, preconceived and deliberate, not relevant to justice, and most importantly they have caused a great amount of damage to both- the Russian government and to the foreign investors, and owners of CJSC «Enterprise with foreign investments «DastinMarket».

… The text of the statement to “ФСФО” RF in the Tyumen region in the Tyumen Arbitration court on the recognition of insolvency (bankruptcy) of CJSC «EFI DastinMarket» is made not on the institution’s letterhead, but on a plain piece of paper and has no seal of the organization. A statement on behalf of the “ФСФО” RF in the Tyumen region, signed by a representative by power of attorney — a specialist N. N. Degtyareva and not the head of the territorial body.

As can be seen from the text of the statement by the Representative filed on behalf of the “ФСФО” RF to the court of arbitration, there were not only attachments missing ,but the following required documents were not even mentioned in the text of the letter:

A notice of the state tax service about the presence of debts on obligatory payments addressed to the territorial authority of “ФСФО” RF. It should be noted that the treatment inspection of FTS №4 for Tyumen in “ФСФО” RF is not stated in the arbitration, nor in the case of Executive production;

The agreed Protocol with the Executive authorities of constituent entities of the Russian Federation or bodies of local self-government at the place of registration of the debtor;

The conclusion of the interdepartmental Commission to “ФСФО” RF about the appropriateness of the recognition of the company bankrupt;

the consent of the municipal/regional/inter-regional bodies on the bankruptcy of CJSC «EFI DastinMarket»;

the order of “ФСФО” RF of application in arbitration court.

… Analysis of the studied documents, namely:

Judgements of the Judicial police officer-executor of Interdistrict division of court bailiffs of the execution of especially important Executive manufactures I. V. Eremchuk about the garnishment on the debtor’s property from 15.09.2003 (L. D. 509 vol 8);

The act of seizure by the bailiff-executor of Interdistrict division of court enforcement officers on execution of especially important Executive manufactures I. V. Eremchuk seized property from 08.10.2003 years (L. D. 514-515 volume No. 8);

The act of seizure by the bailiff-executor of Interdistrict division of court enforcement officers on execution of especially important Executive manufactures I. V. Еremchuk seized property from 17.10.2003 (L. D. 516 vol 8);

Complaint of CJSC «EFI Dastin Market» Ref.№ 141 from 24.12.2003 to the actions of the bailiff-executor of Interdistrict division of court enforcement officers on execution of especially important Executive manufactures I. V. Еremchuk address of the Chief bailiff of the Ministry of justice of the Russian Federation for Tyumen region (L. D. 517 vol 8);

statements of CJSC «EFI Dastin Market» ex. No. 139 19.12.2003 to address the Judicial police officer-contractor оn a division of the bailiffs for the execution of especially important Executive manufactures of Service of court bailiffs Department of the Ministry of justice of the Russian Federation in the Tyumen region (L. D. 519 vol 8);

statements of CJSC «EFI Dastin Market» Ref.№ 126 of 24.12.2003, at the address On the division of the bailiffs for the execution of especially important Executive manufactures of management of the Ministry of justice of the Russian Federation in the Tyumen region (L. D. 525 vol 8);

letters to the Judicial police officer-executor of Interdistrict division of court bailiffs of the execution of especially important Executive manufactures of Service of court bailiffs Department of the Ministry of justice of the Russian Federation for Tyumen region, I. V. Eremchuk ex. No. 4689 from 18.02.2004, and Ref.№ 717 from 15.04.2004, in the address of the head of the Tyumen Regional branch of the Russian Foundation for basic research I. V. Malkov (L. D. 533-534 vol 8),

resolution of the Judicial police officer-contractor On a division of the bailiffs for the execution of especially important Executive manufactures of Service of court bailiffs Department of the Ministry of justice of the Russian Federation for Tyumen region, I. V. Eremchuk about removal of arrest from property of the debtor from 12.01.2004 years (L. D. 523 vol 8);

resolution of the Judicial police officer-contractor On a division of the bailiffs for the execution of especially important Executive manufactures of Service of court bailiffs Department of the Ministry of justice of the Russian Federation for Tyumen region, I. V. Eremchuk about removal of arrest from property of the debtor from 13.01.2004 (L. D. 524 volume No. 8);

the act of acceptance-transfer of the arrested property unrealized No. 982-8-03 from 18.02.2004 years (L. D. 529 vol 8) — confirmation of the presence of seizure of property of CJSC «EFI Dastin Market», its untimely removal, as well as the dereliction of duty on the transfer of funds in the amount of 97.788,79 RUB over the part of sold property in the period before the introduction of the supervision procedure and after.

Thus, the arbitrator of the ICAC found that by violating article 63 of the Federal Law «On insolvency (bankruptcy)» and article 60 of the Federal Law «On enforcement proceedings», not through the suspension of the enforcement proceedings and not the removal of arrest from property of CJSC «EFI Dastin Market», as well as the actual transfer of funds by state bodies for sale of property of CJSC «EFI «DastinMarket» created an artificial situation of financial insolvency with the purpose of carrying out a procedure of bankruptcy of the mentioned company.

The fact that the situation of the bankruptcy of CJSC «EFI DastinMarket» is artificially created is confirmed by the Resolution on imposition of arrest on property of the debtor dating to 15.09.2003, bailiff-executor of Interdistrict division of court enforcement officers on execution of especially important Executive manufactures of Service of court bailiffs Department of the Ministry of justice of the Russian Federation for Tyumen region, according to which, in order to ensure repayment of debts under taxes in the amount of 4.134.244,32 RUB before FTS of Russia № 4 in Tyumen, a non-residential building was arrested, area of which amounts to 4416,9 sq. m., land area 9679,00 sq. m., also an Act of seizure and arrest of property dated 08.10.2003; No. 982/21, under which the circulation of products and consumer goods was withdrawn from the warehouses of CJSC «EFI Dastin Market» (case pages 501-506, 509-516, 526-528, 530-532 vol 8) that violated article 46 of the Federal law «On enforcement proceedings» in part of the order of foreclosure and the specific size and volume of seized property that are necessary for the execution of the Executive document.

Substantially, the property was later sold at the amount of 97788,79 (Ninety seven thousand seven hundred eighty-eight thousand seventy-nine kopecks) rubles. But the money received from the sale of property of CJSC «EFI Dastin Market» were not listed in the Deposit account On a division of the bailiffs for the execution of especially important Executive manufactures (“МПСП” for the execution of the “ОВИП”).

A contract for the sale of property of CJSC «EFI DastinMarket» was signed between the Office of the Ministry of justice of the Russian Federation in the Tyumen region in the face of the acting Deputy head of Department – Main court bailiff of the Tyumen region Boris Pavlov and the Russian Fund of Federal property in the face of the chief of the Tyumen regional branch of Russian Federal property Fund V. I. Malkov, who from the moment of signing of Act of reception-transmission of property is liable for the property transferred for the implementation before handing it to the buyer or to the bailiff-executor. Under the agreement, the Fund shall promptly remit funds received from the sale of the transferred property in the escrow account On the Division Bailiff Service for execution of especially important Executive Manufactures. That has not been done.

Arbitrator of the ICAC notes that the Russian government is responsible for the actions/omissions of their public officials.

…The question of the adjudication on behalf of the Arbitration court of Tyumen region arbitration by the judge V. Loskutov also requires a separate study.

The issued court order 06.02.2004 № And-70-7994/3-2003 the judge of the Arbitration court of the Tyumen region Loskutov V. V. with the procedural violations of the rights of the company Dastin Handelshaus AG approved creditors ‘claims, JSC Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» CJSC «EFI Dastin Market»

By the decree of the Federal arbitration court Western-Siberian region of the Russian Federation dated to 05.04.2004, the Arbitration court of Tyumen region from 06.02.2004 № And-70-7994/3-2003 was set aside and remanded to the trial court for a new trial in a «different composition of the court».

The resolution of Cassation instance corresponds to claim 1 of the Resolution of Plenum of the Supreme arbitration court of the Russian Federation dated 31.10.1996, No. 13 «On the application of the APC in proceedings in the court of first instance» (as amended on 09.07.1997), which provides that in accordance with article 18 of the APC, it is unacceptable for the judge to participate in the court proceedings court in proceedings of which the judge participated previously, in the decision/resolution making or the cancellation of the decision/resolution made, participation in such court proceedings is prohibited.

Examining the given the content of the provisions of article 15, 223 APC RF and article 7 of the Federal constitutional law «About arbitration courts in the Russian Federation», the court decision dating 06.02.2004 held by the judge V. Loskutov in the case of A70-7994/3-2003 is a wrongful procedural form of judicial decision making on the recognition of creditor’s claims, made on the merits of such consideration.

Nevertheless, regarding the result of the violation, the judge of the Arbitration court of the Tyumen region Loskutov V. V. was part of the court, as presiding judge, and concluded the following judgments in № A70-7994/3-2003:

court order dating to 12.04.2005, on the termination of the proceedings

court order dating to 21.07.2004 on the preparation of case for trial;

court order dating to 23.07.2004 on the preparation of case for trial;

court order dating to 02.08.2004 on the procedural succession;

court order dating to 02.11.2004 on leaving the complaint without consideration;

court order dating to 17.01.2005 on the appointment of date of consideration of the report of the bankruptcy administrator in bankruptcy proceedings;

court order dating to 10.02.2005, on the completion of the bankruptcy proceedings by the insolvency representative of CJSC «EFI DastinMarket»;

court order dating to 10.02.2005 year, according to the complaint against the bankruptcy Trustee,

court order dating to 17.05.2007 informed about the refusal to satisfy the application on reconsideration of a judicial act due to newly discovered circumstances and to terminate the proceedings on the complaint.

… Thus, taking into account the fact that the share capital in the amount of 99% in the authorized Fund of CJSC «EFI Dastin Market» belongs to the company Dastin Handelshaus AG means that the company had a prevailing participation in the Charter capital and had an interest in a positive financial result of its subsidiary company, in its successful development, management, and the protection of the violated or disputed rights and lawful interests and freedoms, which were directly connected with carrying out the procedure of bankruptcy in case No. And-70-79994/3-2003 relative to subsidiaries of CJSC «EFI Dastin Market», it is established that the company Dastin Handelshaus AG was unreasonably and unlawfully not granted the status of a person concerned in the said case, in violation of its procedural rights under article 41 of the APC and article 19 of the Federal law «On insolvency (bankruptcy)». The company was declared bankrupt, liquidated and excluded from the register without the consent of the foreign shareholders that is contrary to the clarifications of the Supreme arbitration court of the Russian Federation in INFORMATION LETTER No. 58 dated 18.01.2001.

…The wrongful write-off by the bankruptcy Trustee Shabalina of the receivables in the amount of more than 2 times exceeding the initial requirements of the Inspectorate №4 for Tyumen, according to the tax arrears during the initiation of insolvency, proves the deliberate creation of a situation of an artificial/imaginary/fictitious bankruptcy of CJSC » «EFI Dastin Market» and cause economic loss to the plaintiffs and the state of Russia since there was a non-payment of the tax ammount to the Russian budget.

… Thus, as a result of not carry out non-commercial partnership duties by the «Siberian Guild of crisis managers» (members of which were Yuri Vasilyev-Chebotarev and Y. Shabalin) , arbitrator’s actions constituted breaches, established by the arbitrator of the ICAC at the ICPP in the process of this arbitration. In addition, the Guild has allowed the candidacy of the bankruptcy Trustee Shabalin Y, concealing from the court the lack of competence and lack of proper amount of insurance as to the liquidator for the process of bankruptcy of the enterprise with a statutory Fund and property of more than 400 000 000 rubles.

… 5.9. Additional circumstances.

When arbitration proceedings were conducted at the ICAC, facts were established confirming the pressure on the Plaintiffs in the territory of Russia, through the organisation of illegal criminal prosecution of the company Director and representative of the shareholders A. Schmidt, on the basis of the following documents: Resolution of the Central district court of Tyumen dating to 27.09.2004. The Decision about the excitation of criminal case No. 200403835/14 was recognized illegal on signs of the crimes provided by part 3 of article 30, part 4 of article 159 (fraud) and art. 196 (deliberate bankruptcy) of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation concerning the citizen of the Russian Federation A. I. Schmidt, as held in 31.05.2004 by the “ОБЭП УВД” (The Department for fighting against Economic crimes of MOI )city detective Department of the police Department of the Central JSC Tyumen Reshetnikova. On appeal of Schmidt A. I., the court had established numerous violations of criminal procedural law at the initiation of a criminal case against him, no grounds for such procedural decision were found, there was an infringement of the constitutional and procedural rights of A. I. Schmidt.

The court noted that: «the Analysis of the position of A. I. Schmidt in the course of numerous court proceedings in the conduct of the arbitral proceedings also clearly demonstrates his desire to preserve the solvency of the enterprise headed by him and the fulfilment of the obligations before the Bank».

The illegal criminal case No. 200403835/14 on signs of the crimes provided by part 3 of article 30, part 4 of article 159 (fraud) and article 196 (deliberate bankruptcy) of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation concerning the citizen of the Russian Federation A. I. Schmidt, held on 31.05.2004 by “ОБЭП УВД” city detective Department of the police Department of the Central JSC Tyumen, additionally supported by the following documents:

Court order on Cassation of the Judicial Board on criminal cases of the Tyumen regional court on 25.11.2004.

The resolution of Prosecutor’s office of the Central JSC Tyumen dated to 08.02.2007 on cancellation of the decision on excitation of criminal case and the annulment of the resolution on termination of criminal proceedings;

Definition about replacement of the third party and the suspension of the proceedings of the city court of Nizhnevartovsk Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug — Yugra the Tyumen region of the Russian Federation dated 06.03.2007 in case No. 2-841/07 on compensation for moral damage to rehabilitate Schmidt, A. I., at the suit of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation:

The decision of the Central district court of Tyumen dated 28.10.2011 on the court case № 3/10-376/2011;

The official apology of the Deputy Prosecutor of the Central JSC Tyumen dated 28.10.2011 № 155-204 brought to citizen A. Schmidt in connection with the unjustified attraction it to criminal liability;

The decision of the city court of Nizhnevartovsk Khanty-Mansi Autonomous area — Yugra Tyumen region of the Russian Federation dated 30.10.2007 on the recovery in favor of the citizen of the Russian Federation Schmidt A. I. moral damages in the amount of 30000,00 roubles for illegal bringing to criminal liability.

The circumstances of the illegal initiation of criminal case No. 200403835/14 further compounded by the reluctance of public authorities of the Russian Federation to apply effective measures on restoration of the rights and legitimate interests of shareholders of CJSC «EFI Dastin Market» — the citizen of the Russian Federation A. I. Schmidt and the company Dastin Handelshaus AG, as evidenced by the responses, bearing the formal and referential character, many of the Plaintiffs ‘ complaint, namely (sheet case 117-125 vol 6):

The response of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation dated 25.10.2013, No. 69/1-495-2013/Ow15566-13

The reply of Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation dated 23.12.2013, No. 242/3-R-13;

The response of the office of the President of the Russian Federation on functioning with references of citizens and organizations from 30.12.2013 g. № A26-16-I-3557771;

The reply of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation dated 31.12.2013 No. 242/3-R-13;

The reply of the Investigative Department of the RF IC in the Tyumen region dated 14.01.2014 No. 217/2-17-2014;

The reply of the Investigative Department of the RF IC in the Tyumen region dated 17.01.2014 No. 217/2-17-2014;

The reply of the Regional Department of the FSB of Russia for Tyumen region from 29.01.2014, No. 126/III-46;

The response of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation dated 12.02.2014, No. 69/1-495-2013/Он6345-14.

Moreover, proper verification and response from the President of the Russian Federation, Committee for the fight against corruption, the Council of Federation of the Russian Federation and the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation the message of the citizen of the Russian Federation A. I. Schmidt of the fictitious bankruptcy from 03.05.2010.

In addition, the appeal of the citizen of Germany, Franc Smidt, to the President of the Russian Federation, dated to 20.09.2012 and delivered to the office of the President of the Russian Federation on the functioning with references of citizens and organizations dated to 26.09.2012, which contained the request to check the illegal actions of the officials of the public authorities concerning the expropriation of company property «EFI Dastin Market» is left without consideration and a reasonable answer (221-229 fact sheet case No. 6).

The Arbitrator of the ICAC took into account the admitted case of the Conclusion made by results of studying the material of the arbitration case № A70-7994/3-2003 (102 volumes of photocopies) Professor of the Russian state Academy of intellectual property, member-correspondent of the Academy of social Sciences, Myslovsky E. N. in the period from 03.04.2015 till 29.03.2015, as an additional confirmation of the validity of claims to defendants and their liability in the lawsuit of the Plaintiffs (case 280-287 fact sheet No. 6).

Arbitrator of the ICAC finds that the facts and circumstances set forth in the articles of international commentator, journalist Simakov A., entitled as «Expropriation» dated to 05.10.2012 and “Prosecution. Part 2″ from 25.10.2012, as well as other publications list (issues 98-164 vol 2, 4-83 vol 9) further confirm the validity of the findings of violations of the legislation of the Russian Federation, established in a judicial proceeding in Russia on the bankruptcy of CJSC «EFI Dastin Market». The Information in articles and lists evidence from the moment of their publication in the open press is not denied and not challenged in the courts by corrupt government agencies of the Russian Federation and officials.

… 6.3. In respect of I. A. Schmidt

As a result of unlawful actions of the Defendants in Russia regarding CJSC «EFI Dastin Market», illegal liquidation of the CJSC «EFI»DastinMarket», the onset of all the above serious non-legal consequences, the citizen of the Russian Federation, Shmidt A. I. is no longer eligible for 1% of the share capital of CJSC «EFI «DastinMarket», which resulted in the infliction of economic damage.

The Arbitrator of the ICAC notes that the judges have special knowledge, different from that of ordinary citizens of the Russian Federation, therefore, applicable to them within the meaning of the definition that explicitly States the presumption of knowledge of laws by the judges. The issues and circumstances, breaches committed, violations of the rights of A. Schmidt, of course, testify that there was a discrimination and violation in the regard of the procedural rights , the APC RF, articles 2, 18, 19, 45, h 1,h 2, article 46,part 3 of article 56 of the Constitution. Violations of the current legislation of the Russian Federation (article 8, part 1, part 4. 15 of the RF Constitution) by the defendants actions and omissions on the protection and restoration of violated rights and freedoms of the victim from the authorized bodies of the Russian authorities caused him economic harm (damage). The Arbitrator of the ICAC highlights the part of the plaintiff’s, A. Schmidt’s, appeal to the Russian Federation in a separate proceeding in another Tribunal, the ICAC at the ICPP, with the consent of the plaintiff and guided by the rules of the ICAC at the ICPP.

… 6.4. Khanty-Mansiysk Bank and the responsibility of the state.

At the trial, the ICAC has established that JSC Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» was registered in 1992 in the form of closed joint stock company with a registered capital of 20 million roubles under the name of «Khanty-Mansiysky Bank of revival and development of the people of the North». Since 1996, the Bank was renamed to OJSC «Khanty-Mansiysk Bank». Until 1999, a local territorial office of the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation acted as the main shareholder. From 1999 until December 2010, more than 50% of the share capital was distributed among state enterprises and institutions of the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous district, a subject of the Russian Federation.

Thus, among the major shareholders of the Bank, the following were listed: the Executive Board of the state Fund of generations of the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug — Ugra with the size of the share amounting to 35.5%, Unitary enterprise Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug — Ugra «State insurance company «Yugoria» with the size of the share amounting to 26,52%, Khanty-Mansi district regional development Fund with a size fraction of 10%.;

Moreover, according to the financial statements approved in 26.06.2005 by the Board of the Bank, as of 31.12.2004, the Department of state property of Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug — Ugra in the authorized capital of the Bank a share amounting to in size of 81,861456% existed.

In December 2010, a controlling stake of the OAO Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» was acquired by NOMOS-Bank in the amount of 51.21%

Also, the composition of the Board of Directors of OJSC Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» included the following public servants of the Russian Federation:

Shubin, S. V., — the adviser of the Governor of the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug — Ugra.

Based on the above, the ICAC finds that at the carrying out the procedure of bankruptcy of CJSC «EFI «DastinMarket» in the period of 2003-2005, the Russian Government has indirectly, through the Government of the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug, by the state-owned enterprises and institutions, owned a dominant part and a controlling stake of the OJSC «Bank of Khanty-Mansiysk», and had the opportunity to influence the decisions made by the officials and employees of OJSC «Khanty-Mansi Bank», including the position held in the OJSC «Khanty-Mansiysk Bank», related to the violation of the rights and legitimate interests of the citizen of the Russian Federation ,A. I. Schmidt, and the company Dastin Handelshaus AG under the following circumstances:

in violation of the treatment OAO Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» in the arbitration court of Tyumen region in regard of the statement for recognition of the competitive creditor in the bankruptcy of CJSC «EFI «DastinMarker» in the case of № A70-7994/3-2003;

during the participation of the representatives of OJSC «Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» at the meeting of creditors 03.03.2004, and meetings of creditors 03.03.2004, and 17.06.2004 07.10.2004.

with the participation of representatives of JSC «Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» in court proceedings for the bankruptcy of CJSC «EFI «DastinMarket» in the case № A70-7994/3-2003, and the implementation of improper control as a primary lender and a member of the creditors ‘ Committee (with two representatives) over the activities of the bankruptcy Trustee in the lawsuit;

the illegal initiation of and subsequent penal procedures in criminal cases No. 200403835/14 and No. 201124559/74;

the transfer of ownership of CJSC «EFI «DastinMarket» in the property of their respective structures.

Moreover, it is the representative of OJSC «Khanty-Mansi Bank», in accordance with the minutes of the meeting of the creditors ‘Committee No. 1, dated 03.03.2004, who was elected as the Chairman of the creditors’ Committee and in accordance with articles 17, 18 FL»On insolvency (bankruptcy)» and regulations of the Committee of creditors of CJSC «EFI «DastinMarket», the representative had the responsibility to exercise control over the activities of the bankruptcy Trustee and to represent the interests of creditors in the arbitration process. Furthermore, on the basis of court Decisions in Russia, given the above, the Bank acted as an improper lender.

In the presented documents by the plaintiffs at the ICAC, there is evidence that by many manipulation of OJSC Khanty-Mansiysk Bank», by the arbitration control of the Guild SSAU, by arbitrators Loskutova and in cooperation with the state registration bodies, the main property – the building of the Shopping center «DastinMarket» became the property of a subsidiary of the Bank of Khanty-Mansiysk — OJSC Leasing Company «Yugra-Leasing» (127 fact sheet case No. 9, 600 vol 8), despite a restraining order and the arrest of the real estate transaction, brought to the state register for real estate transactions (sheet case 406-407 vol 8, 409-410 fact No. 8).

Thus, the administrative capacity of the officials and corruption among officials of the state bodies of Russia caused a significant damage to the economic interests of foreign investors, and Russia itself.

The Arbitrator of the ICAC took into account the materials published in the open press, with attached evidence of bad faith of the leaders of OJSC «Khanty-Mansi Bank», particularly in person of the President of the Bank — D. Mizgulin. In addition, the plaintiffs have provided documents presenting money-laundering within the Bank of Khanty-Mansiysk in especially large size, exercised by a group of individuals in collusion with the use of state officials. This evidence and material was addressed to all law enforcement agencies and prosecutors multiple times, since 2004. Criminal case No. 200500108/01 against unidentified individuals of the JSC Bank of Khanty-Mansiysk, which never was investigated and dismissed by the «Statute of limitations,» by the manipulation of the Prosecutor’s office of the Tyumen region headed by the Prosecutor V. Vladimirov and the law enforcement bodies of Tyumen. Also, the Central Bank of Russia has repeatedly, over several years, fined and prosecuteOJSC Khanty-Mansiysk Bank» for «non-execution of requirements of legislation on counteraction to legalization (laundering) of incomes, received by a criminal way, and terrorism financing».

… Thus, the violation, on behalf of the Defendants from Russia, of norms of the Federal law «On joint stock companies», Federal law «On enforcement proceedings», Federal law «On insolvency (bankruptcy), part 2 of article 180 and part 2 of article 182 of the Arbitration procedural Code of the Russian Federation part 1 and part 4 of article 15, part 1,part 2, article 17, part 3, article 56, article 35,part 2 of article 4,article 10 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, decrees of the Government of the RF dated to 15.04.2003, No. 218 «On the procedure of making claims on obligations to Russian Federation in Affairs about bankruptcy and in bankruptcy procedures», the norms of the criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation, consisting in improper performance of the assigned functions, tasks, responsibilities of the Russian state and resulting in unjustified conduct of bankruptcy proceedings of CJSC «EFI «DastinMarket», the cessation of its business and liquidation, illegal bringing to criminal liability of the citizen of the Russian Federation A. I. Schmidt who was a shareholder, Director and representative of the shareholders, a foreign shareholder investor of the specified enterprise, led to non-compliance:

of the Federal law of the Russian Federation «On foreign investments in the Russian Federation»;

of theThe Federal law «On investment activity in the Russian Federation implemented in the form of capital investments»;

The Federal law «On international treaties of the Russian Federation», and the freedom of economic and entrepreneurial activities of the plaintiffs in the case;

and also the following international treaties dated to 27.07.197 between the Soviet Government and the Governments of the Kingdom of Belgium, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg and the Kingdom of the Netherlands, members of the Benelux Economic Union N 02117-1/172 «On trade»;

between the USSR and the governments of the Kingdom of Belgium and the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg dated to 09.02.1989 on the «Agreement on mutual encouragement and mutual protection of capital investments»;

between the Russian Federation and the European communities and their member States «Agreement on partnership and cooperation» dated 24.06.1994;

violation of other norms of international law on the part of the Defendants, which acted as the reason that caused a significant material damage to the company Dastin Handelshaus AG.

However, the ICAC is committed to the principle of Pacta sunt servanda under article 26 of the Vienna Convention on the law of treaties, 23.05.1969 (entered into force for the USSR in 29.05.1986 on the basis of paragraph 2 of article 84), the essence of which is that «Every Treaty in force is binding upon the parties and it must be faithfully executed» and article 27 that «a Party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for failure to perform a Treaty. This rule applies without prejudice to article 46 and article 31, which is widely recognized as a reflective of customary international law, and stipulates in the first paragraph that «a Treaty shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning that is given to the terms of the Treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose».

… Having examined the case, after hearing the parties, the arbitrator finds that since the discriminatory forms of expropriation through the violation of the rules in force at the time of the legislation of the Russian Federation were applied to the plaintiffs in the territory of Russia, both countries — Russia and the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg — had not taken the proper actions in this case, actions that are specifically stated in the Agreement of 1989 on mutual encouragement and mutual protection of investments» and in the laws of both countries as stated in the international agreements, namely: the direct and efficient payment of compensation for lost market value of property to the investors, the recovery of property rights and direct investment. ICAC comes to the conclusion that the payment of such compensation to the plaintiffs in this case, and the claim submitted by the plaintiffs is subject to full compensation…

… In accordance to article 242.2 of the Budget code of the Russian Federation dated to 31.07.1998 N 145-FL (ed. from 26.12.2014) the execution of court decisions for claims against the Treasury of the Russian Federation is vested in the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation, as this provision corresponds with the practice that has developed since 2001 (article 110 of the Federal law dated 27.12.2000 G. N 150-FL»On the Federal budget for 2001″) about the direction of the writ of execution on claims to the Treasury of the Russian Federation for execution by the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation.

Thus, on behalf of the Treasury of the Russian Federation, acts the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation.

… The ICAC at the ICPP orders the state bodies, the banking and other financial institutions under who’s authority the implementation of this Decision falls, to recover in solidarity with the RUSSIAN FEDERATION, by the Government of the Russian Federation, the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation, the self-regulatory organization non-commercial partnership «Siberian Guild of crisis managers», Public joint stock company «Khanty-Mansiysk Bank Open», and the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, represented by the Government and the Ministry of economy and trade, in favor of the shareholders of the company Dastin Handelshaus AG, the suffered economic damages in the amount of 876434,00 51 (fifty-one million eight hundred seventy-six thousand four hundred thirty-four) euros.»

On behalf of the «anti-corruption» monitoring group EAIJ

Almost 52 000 000 Euro are burdened by the Treasury of the Russian Federation, and not a single person was punished in this whole story. Moreover, the damage done by the state officials struck not only the foreign investors and Alexey Schmidt, but the state itself, as the manipulation of the judge Loskutov, bankruptcy Trustees, tax office and Bank of Khanty-Mansiysk, the amount of the initial claim of 8 million rubles from the “ТО ФСФО” have not been paid! From the transactions for the sale of assets and property complex of JSC «DastinMarket», not a single penny of VAT has been paid, regardless its transferring to the balances of the front companies for three times until it was finally transferred to the subsidiary, Bank of Khanty-Mansiysk! More than 10 years, A. Schmidt is being pursued by the State officials, more than 100 people worked on his elimination and the destruction of his property! All material is available at the monitoring group and were sent to the presidential Administration of the Russian Federation, the General Prosecutor Chaika, Bastrykin ICR…

How have we all, the Russian society, sunk to the bottom of this? For how long will we be trapped by these Krakens, which are sucking our blood?

We provide a caution to the Western investors by our published journalistic investigations: the Governor of the Tyumen region, Vladimir Yakushev, is constantly looking for a business partner, as he is interested in concluding contracts with foreign businesses. There is no place for confidence in relation to a person who is in the dense environment of the Tyumen corrupt prosecutors, investigators, policemen, judges – his inactions and actions contribute to the raider attacks, the seizures of someone else’s business on their own territory, other people’s property, other people’s money, he ruins people’s life and fate!”